1
|
Lin YC, Chen CY, Liao YM, Liao AHW, Lin PC, Chang CC. Preventing shivering with adjuvant low dose intrathecal meperidine: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with trial sequential analysis. Sci Rep 2017; 7:15323. [PMID: 29127294 PMCID: PMC5681692 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-14917-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2017] [Accepted: 10/18/2017] [Indexed: 01/07/2023] Open
Abstract
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the pros and cons of adjuvant low dose intrathecal meperidine for spinal anaesthesia. We searched electronic databases for randomized controlled trials using trial sequential analysis (TSA) to evaluate the incidence of reduced rescue analgesics, shivering, pruritus, nausea and vomiting when applying adjuvant intrathecal meperidine. Twenty-eight trials with 2216 patients were included. Adjuvant intrathecal meperidine, 0.05-0.5 mg kg-1, significantly reduced incidence of shivering (relative risk, RR, 0.31, 95% confidence interval, CI, 0.24 to 0.40; TSA-adjusted RR, 0.32, 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.41). Intrathecal meperidine also effectively reduced need for intraoperative rescue analgesics (RR, 0.27, 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.64; TSA-adjusted RR, 0.27, 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.91) and the incidence of pruritus was unaffected (RR, 2.31, 95% CI, 0.94 to 5.70; TSA-adjusted RR, 1.42, 95% CI, 0.87 to 2.34). However, nausea and vomiting increased (RR, 1.84, 95% CI, 1.29 to 2.64; TSA-adjusted RR, 1.72, 95% CI, 1.33 to 2.23; RR, 2.23, 95% CI, 1.23 to 4.02; TSA-adjusted RR,1.96, 95% CI, 1.20 to 3.21). Under TSA, these results provided a sufficient level of evidence. In conclusion, adjuvant low dose intrathecal meperidine effectively attenuates spinal anaesthesia-associated shivering and reduces rescue analgesics with residual concerns for the nausea and vomiting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yu-Cih Lin
- Department of Anaesthesiology, Taipei Medical University Hospital, Taipei, 110, Taiwan
- School of Nursing, College of Nursing, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, 110, Taiwan
| | - Chien-Yu Chen
- Department of Anaesthesiology, Taipei Medical University Hospital, Taipei, 110, Taiwan
- Department of Anaesthesiology, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, 110, Taiwan
- Graduate Institute of Humanities in Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, 110, Taiwan
| | - Yuan-Mei Liao
- School of Nursing, College of Nursing, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, 110, Taiwan
- Institute of Clinical Nursing, School of Nursing, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, 112, Taiwan
| | - Alan Hsi-Wen Liao
- Department of Anaesthesiology, Taipei Medical University Hospital, Taipei, 110, Taiwan
| | - Pi-Chu Lin
- School of Nursing, College of Nursing, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, 110, Taiwan
- Master Program in Long-Term Care, College of Nursing, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, 110, Taiwan
| | - Chuen-Chau Chang
- Department of Anaesthesiology, Taipei Medical University Hospital, Taipei, 110, Taiwan.
- School of Nursing, College of Nursing, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, 110, Taiwan.
- Department of Anaesthesiology, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, 110, Taiwan.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Abstract
Spinal anesthesia can be used effectively and efficiently for a variety of cases in both the inpatient and the ambulatory surgery setting. Choice of agent, dose, distribution, use of adjuncts, and occasionally the use of continuous spinal anesthesia can tailor the spinal anesthetic to a specific type and duration of surgery. Although spinal anesthesia is extremely safe, adherence of new guidelines for patients receiving anticoagulant drugs, LMWH in particular, may minimize the risk of neurologic injury from spinal bleeding. At present, intrathecal adjuncts, such as neostigmine and clonidine used with local anesthetics, have shown limited usefulness, whereas lipophilic opioids, such as fentanyl, appear to increase duration and quality of spinal block without increasing the time to recovery. In the future, shorter-acting local anesthetics, possibly in conjunction with continuous catheter technologies, may reduce recovery times after spinal anesthesia without increasing risk. Spinal agents with long-acting analgesic properties that do not produce sensorimotor deficits may go beyond the immediate perioperative period and relieve postoperative pain. Currently there is controversy surrounding the use of spinal lidocaine and the occurrence of TNS, especially in the outpatient setting. The prudent use of small-dose bupivacaine and possibly procaine may reduce this risk, further supporting the use of spinal anesthesia for ambulatory as well as inpatient surgical procedures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P S Hodgson
- Department of Anesthesiology, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Hansen D, Hansen S. The effects of three graded doses of meperidine for spinal anesthesia in African men. Anesth Analg 1999; 88:827-30. [PMID: 10195532 DOI: 10.1097/00000539-199904000-00027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
UNLABELLED The intrathecal injection of 0.7-1 mg/kg meperidine provides spinal anesthesia of only short duration. In this study, we investigated the effects of three different doses of meperidine for spinal anesthesia on the duration and level of sensory block and the incidence of side effects. Forty-five African men were randomly allocated to receive one of three doses of intrathecal meperidine: Group A = 1.2 mg/kg, Group B = 1.5 mg/kg, and Group C = 1.8 mg/kg. The duration of sensory block was significantly longer after 1.5 mg/kg compared with 1.2 mg/kg meperidine (112 +/- 19 vs 79 +/- 27 min; P = 0.001). Increasing the dose to 1.8 mg/kg did not further increase the duration of block. The level and the onset of the block were not affected by the dose. Common side effects were fatigue (27%), pruritus (20%), and nausea (7%). Seven patients had respiratory depression and seven had a decrease of systolic arterial blood pressure (SAP) >30% from baseline. There was no difference in the incidence of any side effect among groups. Respiratory depression and decreases in SAP were observed 5-50 min after meperidine injection. Twenty-two patients had no pain after the sensory block had terminated. We conclude that increasing the dose of meperidine from 1.2 to 1.5 mg/kg increased the duration, but not the level, of sensory block without an increase in side effects. IMPLICATIONS Intrathecal meperidine 1 mg/kg provides surgical anesthesia for only 40-90 min. We investigated the effects of three larger doses of meperidine in 45 African men. The 1.5 and 1.8 mg/kg doses provide a longer duration of anesthesia compared with 1.2 mg/kg. Nausea, pruritus, and respiratory depression were common in all dose groups. We conclude that increasing the dose of meperidine from 1.2 to 1.5 mg/kg increased the duration, but not the level, of sensory block without an increase in side effects.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D Hansen
- Lilongwe Central Hospital, Malawi, Africa
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Abstract
Overall, most spinal drugs in clinical use have been poorly studied for spinal cord and nerve root toxicity. Laboratory studies indicate that all local anesthetics are neurotoxic in high concentrations and that lidocaine and tetracaine have neurotoxic potential in clinically used concentrations. However, spinal anesthesia (including lidocaine and tetracaine) has a long and enviable history of safety. Spinal analgesics such as morphine, fentanyl, sufentanil, clonidine, and neostigmine seem to have a low potential for neurotoxicity based on laboratory and extensive clinical use. Most antioxidants, preservatives, and excipients used in commercial formulations seem to have a low potential for neurotoxicity. In addition to summarizing current information, we hope that this review stimulates future research on spinal drugs to follow a systematic approach to determining potential neurotoxicity. Such an approach would examine histologic, physiologic, and behavioral testing in several species, followed by cautious histologic, physiologic, and clinical testing in human volunteers and patients with terminal cancer refractory to conventional therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- P S Hodgson
- Department of Anesthesiology, Virginia Mason Medical Center, Seattle, Washington 98111, USA
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Abstract
Pethidine is the only member of the opioid family that has clinically important local anaesthetic activity in the dose range normally used for analgesia. Pethidine is unique as the only opioid in current use that is effective as the sole agent for spinal anaesthesia. In lower doses, intrathecal pethidine is also an effective analgesic for treating pain in labour. This paper reviews the pharmacology of intrathecal pethidine and clinical experience reported to date. Articles reviewed include those identified by a Medline search using keywords "intrathecal" or "spinal anaesthesia/ anesthesia" and "pethidine" or "meperidine". Reference lists from identified papers were scrutinized to identify further relevant articles.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W D Ngan Kee
- Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital
| |
Collapse
|